At my childrens' 350-pupil primary school in suburban Leeds there are now 51 different nationalities represented, from Canadians and Kiwis to Poles and Pakistanis.

There has not been a single incident of racism recorded in nearly two years (and the last one was just a naive word from one 5 year old to another, witnessed by a teacher).

The school was recently awarded outstanding status by Ofsted. If you were to spend an hour at one of the many events we hold, such as the summer fair or the regular 'international breakfasts', you would wonder at the rich diversity and total integration among kids and parents alike.

People like the Express reporter who make derogatory comments about schools like Gladstone ought to be invited to spend an hour or so observing what actually goes on, rather than needlessly stirring up tension and division with ill-informed and unhelpful remarks.

On the issue of language, its generally true that kids who don't speak English at home under-perform academically at school. This ought to change over time as new generations of English speakers come through the school system.

What struck me about the radio interview with the headmistress was her positivity, her enthusiasm and the way she had so successfully adapted to the situation that was not of her making..and not a moan anywhere.

1. In 2011, it was "awarded" Ofsted's lowest ever mark. That means that, up to and including 2011, schoolchildren were getting an extremely substandard education. I'm glad my grandkids didn't go there.

2. How much additional funding has been pumped in to get that school up to its current good standard? Basically, that's money that could have been spent on british kids that's gone on foreign ones. Can't see any mention of that in the Guardian article.

3. My daughter teaches in a former sink school that got shut down following poor ratings by Ofsted and is now run as an Academy by the Dept of Education. It's had a fortune spent on it and the teachers were attracted by being offered extra grades or increments.Can't see any mention of that in the Guardian article either.

1. In 2011, it was "awarded" Ofsted's lowest ever mark. That means that, up to and including 2011, schoolchildren were getting an extremely substandard education. I'm glad my grandkids didn't go there.

2. How much additional funding has been pumped in to get that school up to its current good standard? Basically, that's money that could have been spent on british kids that's gone on foreign ones. Can't see any mention of that in the Guardian article.

3. My daughter teaches in a former sink school that got shut down following poor ratings by Ofsted and is now run as an Academy by the Dept of Education. It's had a fortune spent on it and the teachers were attracted by being offered extra grades or increments.Can't see any mention of that in the Guardian article either.

Failing schools are often turned round with extra investment. That's true regardless of whether they pass your increasingly warped version of the Tebbitt test.

The school is helped by additional local-authority funding for newly arrived pupils in their first three years at school. Around £97,000 this year has funded innovations such as a new "family support worker" who liaises with parents (who may struggle with English) and visits families at home if pupils are absent from school

The school is helped by additional local-authority funding for newly arrived pupils in their first three years at school. Around £97,000 this year has funded innovations such as a new "family support worker" who liaises with parents (who may struggle with English) and visits families at home if pupils are absent from school

Typical mainstream media silence on the issues and costs.

If it's anything like my daughter's school; that's only a fraction of the real costs.

So here we have a school that was poorly rated but has turned itself round. It has also somehow managed to get £100k of money that " it is also likely... no other school has got".... but we don't actually know that.

I am not generally known for the warmth of my feelings toward the teaching industry and its unions, but I do think this is a genuine good news and well-done story.

1. In 2011, it was "awarded" Ofsted's lowest ever mark. That means that, up to and including 2011, schoolchildren were getting an extremely substandard education. I'm glad my grandkids didn't go there.

2. How much additional funding has been pumped in to get that school up to its current good standard? Basically, that's money that could have been spent on british kids that's gone on foreign ones. Can't see any mention of that in the Guardian article.

3. My daughter teaches in a former sink school that got shut down following poor ratings by Ofsted and is now run as an Academy by the Dept of Education. It's had a fortune spent on it and the teachers were attracted by being offered extra grades or increments.Can't see any mention of that in the Guardian article either.

nothing to do with the hard work, dedication, belief and unity of the parents, children and staff then.

So here we have a school that was poorly rated but has turned itself round. It has also somehow managed to get £100k of money that " it is also likely... no other school has got".... but we don't actually know that.

I am not generally known for the warmth of my feelings toward the teaching industry and its unions, but I do think this is a genuine good news and well-done story.

If it's anything like my daughter's school; that's only a fraction of the real costs.

It's also likely to be £97,000 that no other local school has got.

You're the one with the warped perspective.

The school I attended was put on special measures a year after I left. I'm assuming they got extra funding to bring it up to scratch. When I was there I knew of no pupils who were non-British citizens.

The school I attended was put on special measures a year after I left. I'm assuming they got extra funding to bring it up to scratch. When I was there I knew of no pupils who were non-British citizens.